The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Folks, I am unfazed by this and am unsure anything significant in the timing. He could exercise his options anytime prior to their expiry date (maybe they were near to expiry? might be checkable?). So he effectively has all the economic benefit over the exercise price whether he exercises or not. There might be a variety of other timing drivers: eg. tax (sell at 12.25p - perhaps much lower base cost, exercise options at 7p - new base cost?), exposure reduction (not too many eggs in one basket). He is only likely to have been 'long', not 'short'.
Lewis: MAFL has rarely been good at sticking to timings - although I imagine this resource with its multiple gradings, faulting, straight and angled drillings and so on may not be easy to model. We can be quite sure MAFL are pressing for publication - but perhaps the resource upgrade is just not ready and now Christmas is intervening? Hold on in there - it has to be good news nonetheless imho!
Wizard: You have asked me some MAFL questions which I took the trouble to answer and yet you completely ignore them once again, as well as the RNSs and views expressed by many others here and in RNSs. Your oft-repeated views are naïve and absolutely baseless; I encourage all to completely ignore you henceforth. I repeat the end of my last message to you: “I am sure you will follow MAFL’s progress, from which you might learn something about value investing!” GLA
Wizard: I have previously addressed the same questions but many of us suspect you cannot be convinced! The original 4.5Mt valuation equated to $960m worth of in the ground zinc equivalent resource (per bod). In total 10 holes have been drilled yielding world class grades over a more extensive area, so the resource is improved immeasurably (also diminishing the relevance of historic data). If each hole cost $100-200k to drill and assay, capex of say $2m might be an estimate? That capex would not be risked without likelihood of commensurate returns. 10Mt seems easily achievable on basis of RNSs, perhaps more. If a purchaser would pay even 1% of the in ground valuation, that would amount to around $10m, before resource grading, quantity and commodity price uplifts and before expenses. I will not speculate further on values or NAV, the market will no doubt come to many opinions. Also, you seem unaware that only open-ended investment funds trade at NAV (MAFL publishes an NAV under LSE rules). Your arguments on LS book cost and Toral are sadly irrelevant but It is very boring to see them trotted out again and again. I am sure you will follow MAFL’s progress, from which you might learn something about value investing! Good luck.
Hardy, ignore him/her. Harking on and on about what was paid/book cost etc etc is not "reasoned debate" as it completely disregards the vision of highly experienced investors, what has been spent to drill 10 holes to establish their hunch that this was much better than the previous operators had realised, the stellar results of those holes and finally their connections in seeking a deal now with a mining operator. That is what value investing is about, a concept clearly not understood by everybody. A few weeks will prove us right and perhaps then someone will disappear for good in a puff of smoke. Happy Christmas and good luck all.
Whilst we have to await the imminent resource upgrade details, and probably a subsequent sale announcement, one must realise that there has been a substantial capital investment in drilling and analysing 10 new holes over the last 18 months. The results have been pretty spectacular and are game changing (see RNSs). To base any views on pre-drill results/valuations or on book costs would be irrelevant and foolhardy. Nobody would spend substantial amounts drilling, especially after achieving such excellent results, without also seeking best price, which must undoubtedly run to many millions imho. Patience as ever. DYOR, GLA
Let's hope for something within two weeks but it is always a pain trying to do anything business-wise at this time of year! MAFL have not been good at sticking to timetables. Surely more than one party must be sniffing? Although U69 has expressed a different view, it has been mooted in the past that the creative bod might strike a more complicated deal, such as a royalty which would cover the unexplored reserves. They like to surprise us!
Been travelling the last 2 days so out of touch. Still not much happening except some interesting posts. To the question about sale of all or part, there is no doubt it will be a sale of all, including the unexplored zones; MAFL cannot want to go on exploring as this must take up lots of its scarce resources (no pun intended). But a sale can take the form of (A) all cash, (B) all shares, (C) cash and shares, plus in addition to any of those (D) some form of royalty. Surely each of these has different features and thus accrues real value to MAFL (and its sp) at different times? I suspect MAFL will seek (D) in any event as it is an investment company and that will give it ongoing dividends from the minerals which lie deeper than or outside the test drill zones - but not for a few years until LS is in production. (A) needs no comment as THC/MAFL have incurred costs and need at least repayment of those. (B) alone seems highly unlikely. Not everybody has lots of cash so (C) may be inevitable. The value of paper depends upon whether it is private or quoted, how liquid and how diversified/risky a business (FCR was not a good precedent). Paper will not be valued properly (we have all seen the difficulty of keeping track of MAFL's share portfolio). Whatever value one puts on 'in the ground' minerals, I increasingly feel cash will only be part of the deal (whilst, for the impatient, still producing a decent NAV uplift). But should the other part of the value to MAFL accrue over time via (D), that part could be even more valuable over time. How will the market value royalty-type revenues? Probably very imprecisely so that argues for laying down a longer-term holding whilst LS matures (one might call this the "port" approach!) and whilst JV does some other stellar deals (remember he has other irons in the fire?). We have often encouraged continued patience here but it may be we should be preparing to encourage long-term vision and patience. All will be revealed soon but, with the holiday season looming, we must all be looking forward to a happy new year! GLA, DYOR
I agree with Ma5k and Hardy that this has been an open story for quite a long time and I think we have had posts here suggesting that buyers have been sniffing. Given the grades, it must be being talked about in the industry. If there are not a few interested parties already focused, I would be very very surprised. But anybody (the seller too!) would want the resource update before proceeding. GLA.
More modest chat and trading activity recently might mark the lull before the mad storm, fuelled by an anticipated excellent LS resource assessment (why should it not be so after such excellent series of drill results?) before Christmas followed by a long-awaited and anticipated excellent sale announcement, probably during January. MAFL has constantly surprised on the upside and may yet have some surprises up its sleeve. Great value here IMHO. DYOR, GLA
As ever, stakes should be built in advance of the surge, as we know liquidity can be dire. My view would be that it matters little if one buys at 12 or 14 or 16, given the latent value of this share. But some seem intent on waiting to get in at the cheapest possible price, the level of which nobody can predict for an illiquid share like this! Some, maybe many, will miss the boat imho.
I agree with U69. The geo has had most of the results to work on for quite some time so this must be well in hand and should be out when indicated. Whilst we have been disappointed before on timing indications, a professional geo may be a more controllable and deliverable indication!
Nom: Noted. Whilst the Articles may well give flexibility, the issue price is perhaps governed by stock exchange rules, although it is not an area I know a lot about. Suffice it to say, unless you are investment fund, NAV probably has little bearing when raising new capital? We are indeed nearing the point when real values etc will hopefully become a lot clearer. LS is still carried at book cost, making NAV somewhat meaningless. GLA
Nom: I am pretty sure placing shares are issued by reference to their average market price prior to time of issue (VWAP may be one basis), so the NAV at the time would unlikely have much bearing on the issue price.
Ma5k, agreed. You might also read the message as a macro comment since if this is a bubble, it is going to cause s small tidal wave when it bursts, fallout unknown. Just within the last fortnight, someone stole $35m from one of the custody accounts. The papers too have recently been full of advice, some from serious commentators, about it being risky.
U69: I am not sure how you extract from that quote, which is pretty negative about cryptos, that MAFL have been investing. I have been trying steer clear of PYC, cryptos and other fads - and hope MAFL has too!
Hardy, quite! Sadly our half interest in that amount would not even repay the drilling and assay costs! One of several little facts ignored or not understood by a certain person. We should stop giving him/her airtime, I suggest.
U69: Just had a quick look at PYC and LSE says its m cap is �10.2m (50m shares in issue) so still in the microcap sector even if the price has multi-bagged. If you are following it, anything we might learn from investor, mm behaviour etc?
Shake: I agree not everything, and not the world class stuff at every depth, is exceptional so using my words carefully (perhaps wasted on the addressee) I said "some in world class grades". I am not opposed to debate and reasoned points of view either. Biased, uninformed or unjustified points of view are a different matter. And if they are false or misleading, as this website reminds us, they may constitute market abuse.